RE: Is God a logical contradiction?
February 24, 2020 at 6:42 am
(This post was last modified: February 24, 2020 at 7:38 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Not a problem as stated. No stolen concept. If the brain as receiver nutters can get it right, I'm sure that you can too.
A stolen concept isn't an issue of which position is correct, or whether I'm super dumb. Chalmers describes what will be (at least in his estimation), not what is. Chalmers does not think that we can identify a correlate of consciousness until we can determine..first, that a thing is conscious. He does not think that we can do that until we come up with a non-reductive possibly panpsychic new force. He does not accept -human- consciousness by default, as a purveyor of p-zombie objections.
He has a fun and novel position, none of which has to do with your silly fuckup, now some dozens of pages ago, or your subsequent inability to accept that or rephrase your own statements so that you don't end up sounding like a mouthbreather while saying something you don't believe.
Sooooooo...simple, even a dummy like me can get it. What's your excuse? How about we try another example of a stolen concept? Those fun conversations where a substance dualist asserts a property dualist's views and conclusions as true-for-effect, while rejecting the same. Ultimately, while Chalmers views are largely comprised of a genetic criticism, he still thinks that the answer for human consciousness will be found entirely within the brain, by science. The inclusion of his views and assertions as fact making properties of a worldview where there are two substances, the second substance being supernatural...and that this supernatural substance accounts for consciousness - would be a stolen concept. If Chalmers is right, that can't possibly be true...and if that is true, then Chalmers can't possibly be right.
A stolen concept isn't an issue of which position is correct, or whether I'm super dumb. Chalmers describes what will be (at least in his estimation), not what is. Chalmers does not think that we can identify a correlate of consciousness until we can determine..first, that a thing is conscious. He does not think that we can do that until we come up with a non-reductive possibly panpsychic new force. He does not accept -human- consciousness by default, as a purveyor of p-zombie objections.
He has a fun and novel position, none of which has to do with your silly fuckup, now some dozens of pages ago, or your subsequent inability to accept that or rephrase your own statements so that you don't end up sounding like a mouthbreather while saying something you don't believe.
Sooooooo...simple, even a dummy like me can get it. What's your excuse? How about we try another example of a stolen concept? Those fun conversations where a substance dualist asserts a property dualist's views and conclusions as true-for-effect, while rejecting the same. Ultimately, while Chalmers views are largely comprised of a genetic criticism, he still thinks that the answer for human consciousness will be found entirely within the brain, by science. The inclusion of his views and assertions as fact making properties of a worldview where there are two substances, the second substance being supernatural...and that this supernatural substance accounts for consciousness - would be a stolen concept. If Chalmers is right, that can't possibly be true...and if that is true, then Chalmers can't possibly be right.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
